M/S. MAHARAJA SHREE UMAID MILLS LTD. JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

income at Rs.7,84,12,208/- as there was a disallowance under Section 32 (1) (iia) of Rs.3,53,65,893/- being additional depreciation

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. KAYAKALP HERBAL PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

depreciation on property situated at Motu Ka Bass 5. Disallowance of EPF 19,777 employees contribution by applying the provisions of section 36(1)(va)/2(24)(x) Total 1,93,03,300 Less Additional income

KANHAIYALAL RAMESHWAR DAS,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

income was assessed at Rs.1,61,76,089/- by\nmaking additions on account of disallowance of unabsorbed depreciation.\nThe assessee

KANHAIYALAL RAMESHWAR DAS,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

income was assessed at Rs.1,61,76,089/- by\nmaking additions on account of disallowance of unabsorbed depreciation.\nThe assessee

MANGI LAL KANDOI ,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

addition on account of income surrendered by the assessee during the course of search. The learned CIT(A) has also mentioned on page 13 of the appellate order that the surrender of income was not voluntary and the income was offered by affidavit agreed to consider in the hands of the assessee. The Learned CIT(A) further relied upon certain

SHRI VIKRAM SINGH SHEKHAWAT,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Income Tax-6, Kanpur Vs. M/s JK Cement, Kamla Tower in [45 ITR 50] wherein it was held that where additional depreciation

HARBANS LAL SETHI,JAIPUR vs. ADDL. CIT, KOTA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

income of the assessee in the current year is enhanced by Rs.54,11,562/-, resulting to final addition of Rs.80,07,358/-.” Conclusively, the ld. CIT(A) enhanced the addition made by the AO by Rs.54,11,562/- which finally resulted into total addition of Rs.80,07,358/-, which in terms of NP rate (subject to Interest & depreciation

COMPUCOM SOFTWARE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-VI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

income and depreciation chart submitted by the assessee company in respect of power plant as well as wind mill wherein the assessee has claimed depreciation @ 80% on written down value as well as additional

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BANGUR NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee - appellant in ITA No

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

income. [For Additional Ground No. 3] 5.0 Allowability of depreciation on leasehold rights on land u/s 32(1)(ii) being

ITO(E), JAIPUR vs. MAYURA SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

depreciation Rs. 3,09,169 +surplus (Excess of income over expenditures) Rs. 11,45,269. — Rs. 8,60,390 capital expenditure (addition

KATH BROTHERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

income surrendered by the assessee during the survey on account of discrepancy in cost of construction of building, discrepancy in stock and discrepancy in advances and receivables would be considered as business income and not as deemed income under section 69.” • In the case of Bajaj Sons. Ltd., the Hon’ble Chandigarh Bench of ITAT, ITA No. 1127/CHD/2019, has stated

LAXMI NARAIN AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11

addition has been made being the income declared by the assessee is higher as compared to the income derived after application of such N.P. rate subject to interest and depreciation

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. LAXMI NARAIN AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11

addition has been made being the income declared by the assessee is higher as compared to the income derived after application of such N.P. rate subject to interest and depreciation

LAXMI NARAIN AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11

addition has been made being the income declared by the assessee is higher as compared to the income derived after application of such N.P. rate subject to interest and depreciation

LAXMI NARAIN AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11

addition has been made being the income declared by the assessee is higher as compared to the income derived after application of such N.P. rate subject to interest and depreciation

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. LAXMI NARAIN AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11

addition has been made being the income declared by the assessee is higher as compared to the income derived after application of such N.P. rate subject to interest and depreciation

LAXMI NARAIN AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11

addition has been made being the income declared by the assessee is higher as compared to the income derived after application of such N.P. rate subject to interest and depreciation

RAMESH CHAND BANSAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, AJMER

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

depreciation and the Assessing Officer did not honour the agreement. 3.1.2. After the coming of Sec. 271AAA applicability of Sec. 271(1)(c) has been completely ruled out by Sec. 271AAA(3). Moreover, the provisions of Sec. 271AAA starts with a non-obstante clause and overrides all other provisions of the Income Tax Act which essentially includes